This headline from the @LATimes isn't just blatantly false and misleading; it's also the result of

[Celerity]

a years-long propaganda campaign by the fossil fuel industry to halt progress on climate change.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1533280436192825344.html

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[BumRushDaShow]

1. The small/portable Korean and Japanese burner/stoves use butane cans

I have a nice butane burner that actually gets hotter than my (low-end/basic) natural gas stove's burners.



The area Asian and International markets sell 4- or 6-packs of (standard) butane cans at a reasonable price, that fit in it, and they can last for a good amount of time if used perhaps a couple times a week (I only use mine a couple times a year - should pull it out more though).



I know the "street" vendors use propane as obviously they can't really do a natural gas hookup like that unless connected to an indoor restaurant too. But for indoor restaurants, trying to retrofit might be a pain and certainly California (probably moreso in northern in the Bay area) might have an issue. I think many Asian families who are in homes/apartments with electric, will get a couple butane burners for bbq that can be whipped out if needed. I got the BBQ plate attachment (and used it a couple times) for my Iwatani (base has to be filled with water to also provide steam and catch any drippings that might flame-up) -

[MichMan]

2. Are those small butane aerosol cans better for the environment than natural gas?

Are the empties just thrown in the trash?

[BumRushDaShow]

6. There are the 3 different gases

methane (CH4) vs propane (C3H8) vs butane (C4H10).

I think the big difference is quantity produced/used for the application and the idea of portability, where propane and butane are used on a tiny scale compared to methane (the "natural gas" used in home heating/cooking/appliances like dryers, etc), that gets pumped through pipes from natural gas plants.

So in that latter case, you have that bigger potential for leaks (and atmospheric release) on a large scale when compared to "individualized use" canisters. And the empties can be recycled if completely emptied and punctured.

The larger propane tanks have been used for home heating and medium ones for bbq grills, while the small butane and propane canisters have been used for years in camp stoves (e.g, the Coleman ones) -



One of my issues with "all electric" is that if it's not from solar or hydro or wind, then the power plant is either run by some fossil fuel itself or from nuclear (and I know there are a number of nuclear proponents here on DU but it's crickets when it comes to the radioactive waste from the spent fuel rods and what happens to those).

[mopinko]

8. they ignore the impacts of the huge amount of concrete and steel, too.

concrete is one of the most energy intensive things we use. i was reading an article yesterday about uses for coal ash, and you can apparently make great concrete out of it. but it's not much less energy output than the regular kind.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Absolutely true

and many (if not most) need to be near a water source for "cooling".

[mopinko]

16. yup. i have the aging, shuttered zion nuke plant sitting about 50 mi north of me.

sits on lake mich, water source for millions of people.

[BumRushDaShow]

23. I'm 20 miles from the last nuke plant built in PA

Limerick. I remember my high school physics teacher took us on a tour of it while it was still under construction and the owners (PECO) "promised" that by the time it was running, the electric bills would only be $3 per month.



(it was finally fully operational about 10 years after that tour)

[mopinko]

24. 'too cheap to meter'

kristen lems had a song about that.
ftr, i put up solar last year and my last 2 elec bills were about $20. mostly fees. i got paid more than that for excess power.

[BumRushDaShow]

28. LOL @ "too cheap to meter"

Although we're no way near there yet to technologically deploy on a wide basis, I think that "self-generation" by a home or business (whether through direct panels, construction materials that can absorb and convert energy from the sun and/or ground, etc), rather than have a "grid", is going to be the way to go, where a regional "backup" could still be deployed to tap into if needed (and excess not used by individual homes/businesses, can be stored there).

[ProfessorGAC]

43. Only One Problem

Propane delivers about 733kJ of heat per carbon atom. Methane, with only one carbon atom delivers 890kJ.
Since we get one CO2 for each molecule of methane, but 4 per molecule of propane, the latter has a greater deleterious impact on climate change.
To get the same heat value, we only need about 2.5 methanes vs. one propane. CO2 emissions are then nearly 20% higher for propane at equal heat release.

[BumRushDaShow]

47. However my point was

because methane is a simple molecule, you still need much more methane by volume (gas volume wise) for an application - BUT with butane or propane, you don't have miles of permeable pipeline as a delivery infrastructure, where leakage can and does happen along that route, and bleeds hydrocarbons into the atmosphere along the way. And out in the street, it takes a larger leak for the mercaptan to be detected to prompt someone to actually find the source, and fix the leak.

I.e., you have "individualized usage" with propane and butane where it's easier to "turn off the valve" when done, than trying to go into a street to the mains and crank a valve shut (although you can obviously turn it off in the house but there is still that pipeline going to the mains in the street).

[ProfessorGAC]

48. I Suppose

I'd need to see a comparison of leaked methane against CO2 as a combustion product and their relative impact on climate.
It seems it would take A LOT of leakage to compensate for 20% more CO2 being generated to provide needed heat.
If leakage is that high, I'd think that would be a high impact step, especially since there's a direct financial impact on the providers.
Feels like win-win. Less emissions, less wasted dollars.

[BumRushDaShow]

53. The city of Philadlephia owns it's own (monopoly) gas company

Philadelphia Gas Works

PGW: Around Our City, Around the Clock

MISSION: Enhance the quality of life for all by delivering safe, reliable, and affordable energy in an environmentally responsible way.

Since February 10, 1836, when the first employees of the newly formed Gas Works lit forty-six lights along Second Street, PGW has been serving the fine people of Philadelphia 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

Today PGW is the largest municipally owned gas utility in the country. We manage and maintain a system of over 6,000 miles of gas mains and service pipes that deliver an annual 78 billion cubic feet of safe, reliable natural gas to our 500,000 customers each year.

We, like the great city we serve, have a rich, dynamic history that is leading us into a promising, productive future. Check out our latest Annual Report.

In our city of 1.6 million people, PGW manages 6000 miles of pipe.

I remember reading this article about the "problem" when it was first published -

Philly’s miles of old, leaky gas mains: A potentially deadly, Earth-warming problem

Anna Orso
Apr. 16, 2015, 10:58 a.m.


Philadelphia is a city of old meets new, and Billy Penn will take a look at much of the old. We’re looking to take a deep dive into different facets of the city’s aging — and largely ailing — infrastructure in a new series. We’ll go over the history, the problems and what the city is doing to remedy the situation. Philly’s gas pipes are old and leaking — in fact, there’s a startling amount of potentially explosive stuff seeping into the ground in these parts. And there’s not much the city can do quickly to fix it.

The amount of pipes Philadelphia has that are made up of an antiquated material is higher than any other utility company in the country, and the city’s sometimes-100-year-old gas mains are springing upwards of 2,000 leaks per year. These leaks can cause explosions and are slowly pushing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming on a huge scale. And the city and the state simply don’t have enough money to quickly take care of it.

The Problem

Philadelphia’s leaky natural gas pipes are some of the worst in the nation, and much of that is due to this: More than half are made of cast iron and unprotected steel — materials utility companies stopped using for new pipes in the ’60s. According to an investigation by The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the feds urged states in the 1970s to replace cast iron pipes because they’re more prone to leakage and make up the vast majority of natural leaks across the country. The highest concentration of these pipes is right here in Philly, where half of the 3,000 miles of pipeline are cast-iron.

The Trib also reported that Philadelphia Gas Works reported 89 leaks per hundred miles of pipelines in 2013, which is somewhere around eight times the national average. These pipes that can be more than 100 years old in some cases can spring somewhere around 2,000 leaks a year, according to the Inquirer, and can eventually cause gas mains to rupture and blow up buildings or homes in the area.

https://billypenn.com/2015/04/16/phillys-miles-of-old-leaky-gas-mains-a-potentially-deadly-earth-warming-problem/

I say this as someone born and raised in a (natural) gas household (home heat, hot water heater, cooking, clothes dryer) and you'd have to pull my gas stove out of my cold dead hands...

BUT... that's the reality. OLD INFRASTRUCTURE.

Hell, this city is STILL pulling almost 200 year old tree trunk water mains out of the ground.

[hunter]

9. Dimethyl Ether (DME) is a synthetic fuel that could replace propane and butane.

It's being synthesized from fossil fuels in several places around the world to reduce urban air pollution caused by coal, charcoal, and wood cooking fires.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_ether

It's also useful as a motor fuel. It can be used in modified diesel engines where it burns much more cleanly than diesel fuel.

DME synthesized from fossil fuels does not reduce CO2 emissions, it's primarily used now to displace air pollution from cities to the rural areas where it's synthesized.

DME could be synthesized from atmospheric or oceanic carbon dioxide using nuclear power which would make it a near carbon neutral fuel.

So yeah, "cooking with gas" can still be a thing even in a world that has abandoned fossil fuels.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. It probably could

as a recoverable byproduct that itself can be used for some similar application. How that can get translated to a large scale - either for onsite use or for bottling - is probably something that they would investigate.

And the one thing to keep in mind about methane (spoken from me the retired chemist) is that the literal "volume" of methane due to it being the simplest hydrocarbon (a non-chain one) needed for whatever application (heat/cooking/drying) is a number of times more than what would be used by the larger (but still-small chain) hydrocarbons.

So per cubic ft, you need a couple times more methane to achieve the equivalent heating/cooking flame that a propane or butane tank/canister could provide.

[ProfessorGAC]

44. I Don't Agree

DME still only releases about 720kJ per carbon atom, vs. methane.
Upon combustion, it still releases 2 molecules of CO2.
Since it creates far less heat per mole than 2x, (more like 1.65 fold) it is not a solution to climate change.
To get the same heat value, we make MORE CO2.
Also, the hydrogenation of the 2 CO2 molecules (we need 6 hydrogen atoms for each 2 CO2) is a high pressure process requiring a huge capital outlay.
I don't see this as a good alternative to NG.

[hunter]

55. Natural gas is the fuel that will destroy the world's natural environment as we know it...

... and likely our civilization as well. We need to quit now.

"Better than coal" isn't nearly good enough.

If we cut back on natural gas to the extent required to "save the world" there will be no reason to maintain the current natural gas distribution network.

In that case smaller users will switch to bottled gas, be it synthetic propane, butane, or DME, and larger industrial users may use synthetic methane if they can't use electricity or nuclear heat directly.

If we wish to maintain our existing high energy industrial economy and sustain our population of 8 billion, the only alternative to fossil fuels is nuclear power. We've worked ourselves into a corner here. If we quit fossil fuels without nuclear power then billions of us will suffer and die. If we don't quit fossil fuels billions of us will suffer and die. We are all dependent on high density energy sources, wealthy or impoverished.

On hundred years from now, if our civilization is still around, most high energy chemical synthesis will be accomplished in high temperature nuclear power plants. Solar and wind can't displace fossil fuels entirely and fusion energy is still a dream. We can't sit around waiting for miracles.

Once small modular reactor technology is commercialized it's probably going to experience rapid growth. This will reduce the demand for long distance energy transmission schemes of all types -- gas pipelines, underwater and overground HVDC lines, and oil or LNG supertankers. It will also make many solar and wind schemes redundant.

[ProfessorGAC]

70. No Argument From Me

I was just opining that DME is not a solution, except maybe if it can be turned into a closed loop from CO2. Not sure that's realistic.
I'm not defending natural gas, despite it's advantages over coal & petroleum.
If you look farther down the thread you'll see i question California wisdom as they were responsible for accelerating shutdowns of nuke plants are refused to permit new ones for decades.
We're on the same page on this issue. Completely.

[hunter]

86. I was part of that nuclear shutdown.

I spent a lot of time on the road, burning more than my fair share of gasoline, between Humboldt Bay and San Onofre.

It started when I was seventeen and met Helen Caldicott, having quit high school at sixteen seeking some kind of glory.

Then things got really strange...

I was at the Diablo Canyon protest nearby Jerry Brown when he announced "No new nukes!"

Meaning of course that Diablo Canyon was a done deal. Most of the crowd didn't immediately grasp that.

That's as close as I get here to my personal history.

These days I think it would be stupid to shut down Diablo Canyon prematurely.

[ProfessorGAC]

88. They Were Talking About Shut Downs Here...

...in northern Illinois, too. Three of them in the same 40 month timeline.
The state went nuts because small school districts would see funding drop by nearly 25%.
Local environmentalists (you're reading that right) pushed back, saying we need those nuke plants because of climate change.
Even highly active folks on the environment are seeing nukes as a viable alternative to turning the entire planet into a warming oven.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

3. Clean energy is great, but more electricity demands? Grid is shaky, more summer power blackouts?

[Celerity]

4. the grid needs to be upgraded

[paleotn]

19. Yep...for like the last 20 freaking years.

[Celerity]

20. probably longer than that, lol, I am sure it was in bad shape before 2002

[BumRushDaShow]

25. The condition was bad enough to be a contributing trigger to the "great NE blackout of 2003)

Last edited Sun Jun 5, 2022, 11:19 AM - Edit history (1)

https://www.power-grid.com/executive-insight/13-years-after-the-northeast-black-of-2003-changed-grid-industry-still-causes-fear-for-future/



Thankfully here in Philly, the grid operators monitoring the PJM Interconnection (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) grid were able to make some quick decisions that although killed the power in upstate (NE) PA, saved it further south through Philly and into D.C., which is part of that grid. So we didn't lose power here (thankfully).

ETA - the PJM coverage area -

[paleotn]

18. Can't decarbonize by just flipping a switch (pun intended)

It should be a balanced, coordinated transition. That doesn't seem to be the case, with private generators shutting down fossil plants due to operating costs before replacement generation is even up and running. A chaotic mess. Throw in a scorching summer due to climate change (irony...the whole point of this exercise) and we may see capacity problems in places that don't usually have those problems. THAT'S where we need to be spending shit tons of federal money and not just yapping about it for a decade. If I hear "smart grid" roll from the lips of any politician again, D or R, I think I'll scream.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-midwest-danger-rotating-power-blackouts-this-summer-2022-06-03/

[Icanthinkformyself]

5. Adam

ruins everything, doesn't he? So, what's happening is the construction industry is being encouraged to go 'all electric' like the auto industry is, finally, doing. There are and will continue to be, fossil fuel driven vehicles for several more years. It's called phasing in the changes. Gee, one would think the oligarch owned news would be honest. s/, if needed.

[AllaN01Bear]

7. i live in an all electric apartment . hem . when the power goes out , evrything goes out

even the elevator.if the power goes out , i have to replace evrything in the refrigerator . so, if the electricity goes out , their bussniess shut down?
hem.

[hunter]

10. What kind of shit hole nation can't keep the lights on?

Oh.

[paleotn]

21. Lol!!

[EX500rider]

41. Where exactly are blackouts common in the US?

They were a weekly thing when I lived in Central America, alternate days of water on also sometimes.

[BumRushDaShow]

52. "Where exactly are blackouts common in the US?"

On my sister's block in Montgomery County PA in her township in what is one of those post-WW2 suburban developments where all the electric lines were strung on poles at the far end of their backyards, conveniently "hidden" in a stand of trees for aesthetics almost 70 years ago.

And so now, for the almost 20 years she has lived there, the branches keep falling and falling and falling, bringing down wires, snapping poles, and blowing up transformers, literally year round (in winter due to snow/ice load on branches and summer due to wind/heavy rain storms, while PECO feeds a contractor (Asplundh) lots of $$$$ to trim the branches around the wires.



And then here in the city, when they pruned, this is what was done to the trees (the "Y" treatment) -

[Iggo]

83. Southern California, in the summer.

Rolling blackouts, motherfuckers!!! 🤘😎

[Celerity]

13. hem is Swedish for home

lägenhet means apartment/flat (rental, which can mean either you hold the lease, ie första hand, or you sublease it, ie andrahand)

bostadsrätt means condo (you can rent it as well, from the owner, as long as the association's board ie bostadsrättsföreningen, approves the lease)

hus generally means a standalone house

sommarstuga is a smaller (usually, although they can be quite large) summer/holiday house such as these:

traditional




modern

[AllaN01Bear]

11. these is the same paper that killed subays in la

the pacific electric was bought out by big oil/ auto and tire .
replaced by stinking busses . the pe wanted elevated trains and subways to avoid the congested streets but the la times said no. la times sure went from left leaning to absolute crazy since i left.

[brooklynite]

17. As a Transportation Planner, I can say that the National City Lines conspiracy...

...is vastly overstated. Most streetcar lines were already being converted to buses or discontinued because of greater flexibility around growing car traffic, or post-war expansion to housing in the suburbs, which weren't easily served by public transportation.

[BumRushDaShow]

22. When you mention that subway in LA

all I can think of is this -

[brooklynite]

14. As a rule I don't go to a "standup comedian and TV host" for informed opinion.

Yes it’s only for new buildings, but that will eventually affect restaurants. And cooking is better accomplished on a gas range (more precise heat control).

I’ll also note that, unless you have a handy waterfall nearby, electrical power needs to be generated from some other energy source.

[Celerity]

26. Conover fully documents his claims, and he has the same level of education as many Politico writers

He has a bachelor's degree in philosophy from Bard College, and is the only member of his nuclear family without a PhD, so he has hardly been raised in a non academic-friendly environment. His younger sister is Emily Conover, a science reporter at Science News who holds a PhD in particle physics from the University of Chicago.

Comparison: Jack Shafer is Politico's Senior media writer (as this OP is a critique of the media), and he doesn't have a journalism degree, his only degree is a BA in communications from Western Michigan University.

[brooklynite]

27. I thought we were beating up on the LA Times in this thread?

What does Politico have to do with it?

[Celerity]

30. I used Politico as an example because you post it a lot

These are from the last 10 days (I do not know if you 'journal' every OP, plus I am not counting Politico links you may have used in replies)


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=journals&uid=112524

[brooklynite]

31. I post news stories from Politico...

...the discussion at hand is an opinion piece. Still don't see the link.

[Celerity]

32. you are ignoring all the articles he backed up his claims with, and unlike Politico

Conover (I have never posted him before, but have seen his tweets, etc, often here) is not a constant source of RW talking points nor a purveyor of many slanted divide et impera 'Democrats in disarray' articles.

good post from NurseJackie on this very subject

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216027544

[Just A Box Of Rain]

57. The "claims" are false ones, as anyone who has cooked on gas vs electric knows.

This policy will inflict significant economic pain on an industry that has traditionally been a pathway for upward social mobility in exchange for very small benefits.

LA could benefit greatly from strengthening our shakey electrical grid and replacing automobiles and public transport with cleaner-energy options, but this law is ill-considered.

[Nixie]

77. +1000, this is unmistakably an attempt to label the Times a RW

source. I’ve seen who they endorsed and it probably wasn’t met well, so now the LA Times is going to be messaged as RW.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

29. Saying it will only affect new restaurants is a lame argument in a dynamic city

that is constantly re-building and re-inventing itself. I'm a lifelong resident of Los Angeles. Trust me, it is not a city in stasis.

The notion that electric stovetops cook like gas is false.

Maybe there is a reason this guy is the only member of his family without a PhD?

[Celerity]

33. the new rule would apply only to newly constructed buildings, not a swap out of one resto to another

so there is that

Welcome to DU, as you just joined us a few hours ago.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

34. And as I said, LA is constantly re-building and re-inventing itself.

Limiting this to new construction only would still choke an industry that has already been hammered by Covid and other economic challenges.

The idea that electric cooks like gas is false. This will do harm.

There are a myriad of ways that electrification gives people an upgrade, this is not one of them.

[Celerity]

35. The climate-destroying and health-endangering natures of fossil fuels are the paramount issue, they

are far more negatively impactful on balance than electrification, especially when said electric power comes from renewables or a far more efficient source like nuclear (which is already very safe now, and will only get safer as the next gen reactors come online over the coming decades).

[Just A Box Of Rain]

36. Which makes electrification a win-win when it boosts businesses (and individuals),

but in this case forced electrification endangers restaurateurs who are already under considerable economic stress.

[Celerity]

37. I disagree with your premiss, it is not a valid one at the present time.

forced electrification endangers restaurateurs who are already under considerable economic stress

There is not a single existing one who will be forced to convert now, unless they choose to move into a newly built structure, which would hardly be the move of a struggling, under large economic stress, business.

The line must be drawn. Fossil fuel use needs to be wound down as much as possible, as quickly as is remotely feasible, globally.

I do not know your age, but I am 25yo, and the future for me and the billions in my age cohort (birth to 30, 35yo or so), plus the coming ones, is grim indeed when it come to anthropogenic global climate change.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

39. Do you believe that Los Angeles is a city where construction is static?

If you do, you are wrong.

This is a protean city where new buildings go up constantly.

What is a false premise is to believe that limiting forced electrification to new construction won't harm an industry that has already taken body blows.

It is also a false premise that electric cooks like gas.

We have plenty of electrification options in my city that would have a greater impact on climate change and would upgrade people's lives w/o imperaling their businesses.

May the years ahead bring you wisdom to match your zeal.

[Celerity]

40. I was born in Los Angeles, my parents moved back to London when i was less than 2, raised in London,

with a brief (several years) stint in Hong Kong when I was also young.

That said, I did live again in Los Angeles (Marina del Rey, Ted Lieu is my House rep) as a young adult, whilst I read for my MBA, plus I have visited family (on my mum's side) there several times as well.

I have now lived in Sweden for the most part since we left LA after I graduated. I am well aware of the fluid and varied sociocultural, socioeconomic nature, structures, interlocks, and latticing of the Los Angeles/San Diego (I adore La Jolla, where my uncle lives, if we ever move back to the US, that would be a primary choice) metropolitan area. I also stand by all that I have posited in this colloquy.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

42. Then I'm sure, with your perspective, that you know Los Angeles is a city

that is in constantly in flux.

The changes can be shocking even to people who reside here. You must see that when you visit, no?

It makes the argument that this will only affect "new construction" somewhat fatuous in my estimation.

We have plenty of electrification projects (including stabilizing a fragile grid) that can do good w/o causing harm.

[Celerity]

49. They rewrote building codes to require NEWLY built homes and buildings to achieve zero-carbon

emissions, not resto swaps/moves to pre-existing structures.

It makes the argument that this will only affect "new construction" somewhat fatuous in my estimation.

It clearly is not fatuous at all to disagree with your framing attempts to state otherwise.

https://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2022/22-0151_misc_2-9-22.pdf



it passed unanimously

https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=22-0151

[Just A Box Of Rain]

56. Framing attempts?

There are no "framing attempts" on my part.

All those who would hope to open new restaurants in newly constructed building would be negatively impacted (and that's an extreme understatement).

Electric doesn't perform like gas in kitchens. Saying it does is the false framing here.

There are so many constructive projects that are win-wins, that killing the future of the restaurant industry in Los Angeles is a very misguided move.

[Celerity]

58. There is no 'killing the future of the restaurant industry in Los Angeles' from this at all, that

is a perfect example of the hyperbolic negative framing I am talking about.

You seem really invested in slating off a unanimous, pro climate vote by a Democratic Party-dominated City Council.

All those who would hope to open new restaurants in newly constructed building would be negatively impacted

Fossil fuels are going to come to an end sooner or later, so this is simply taking a stance to once again kick the can down the road.

Many taxes and multiple regulations may negatively impact (at primary level, not talking about secondary, tertiary, etc benefits they may derive from the outlays of public monies) the net financial streams for businesses. Should we do away with many of those as well?

This is now sliding into the domain of RW and pro Big Fossil Fuel talking points.

Done here.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

60. How dare you to accuse me of spreading RW talking points.

Really a low road.

Democrats can disagree to public policies without resorting to this kind of junk.

Forcing future restaurants to give up a vital tool has serious downsides that will cause economic pain that is not commensurate with the benefits.

[Nixie]

73. +1, the accusations are a predictable pattern.

Your points are good ones, but I would bet this is also about messaging about the LA Times.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

76. Wowzer.

Thanks for the confirmation!

[Nixie]

80. Absolutely!

There's also a very extensive messaging technique involved in labeling sources "RW" so that's my hunch about this hit on the LA Times. I've seen who they endorsed for the June 7 primary, and it probably wasn't met well, so now it's going to be maligned as "RW." The messaging campaigns are very predictable. Thanks for the reality does to this Twitter thread.

[Nixie]

79. +1000, a lot of very established restaurants cannot afford the new lease prices and are

are forced to close or relocate in a very expensive real estate market. It's always in flux.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

82. Yep. So many restaurants are wobbling and are on their last legs.

The pandemic has slashed incomes, made retaining workers more difficult, and rents can force owners to shutter their businesses or force relocations.

It has always been a tough business. Now it is brutal.

Mandating that new ovens run on electricity would be sensible, as electric ovens do compete with gas (and are prefered by many).

But that's not true on stovetops.

[Zeitghost]

46. So it delays the ban a few years.

The restaurant business is chaotic, new ones pop up, old ones fade away. Even long term successful ones change locations or do remodels to accommodate expanded business. Remember, "new construction" means basically anything that is permitted. Want to gut the old kitchen and upgrade and expand, as my favorite restaurant just did, that's "new construction".

[Celerity]

50. renovation isn't a newly constructed building, which is what the legislation specifically applies to

[Zeitghost]

64. So it's a few more years

And for what? To push all decent new restaurants just outside the city limits?

[Celerity]

65. 'To push all decent new restaurants just outside the city limits'

that is not going to happen

that is pro fossil fuel hyperbole

[ripcord]

38. There are already days where it is illegal for me to use my smoker in California nt

[ProfessorGAC]

45. Is This The Same State...

...that accelerated shutdown of nuke plants & discouraged or forbade building new ones for decades?
How do they think they'll get the electricity? Only 22.6% of the power comes from solar or wind.

[Celerity]

51. California approves 11.5 GW of new clean resources in largest-ever single procurement order

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/california-approves-115-gw-of-new-clean-resources-in-largest-ever-single-p/602417/

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on Thursday voted to approve an 11.5 GW procurement package composed entirely of clean energy resources that will come online in the middle of the decade, marking its largest-ever capacity procurement ordered at once. The new resources are intended to prepare the state for more extreme weather and help replace the 2.2 GW Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, which will be shuttered by 2025, as well as 3.7 GW of natural gas plants that also are slated to retire soon.

“This is a landmark decision. I don’t think it’s hyperbole to describe it as such,” CPUC Commissioner Clifford Rechtschaffen said at the Thursday meeting. “This is enough to power about 2.5 million households in the state, and all this will be coming from renewable or zero-emitting resources,” he added. The procurement will serve as a “new, clean reliability foundation for California’s electric sector,” the commission said in a statement.

The decision sets California on the path of bringing online 2,000 MW of resources by 2023, followed by increments of 6,000 MW, 1,500 MW and 2,000 MW by 2024, 2025 and 2026, respectively. The procurement requirements will be distributed among load-serving entities in proportion to their electric system load. “We need these resources. We need them to respond to the changing climate and to more extreme weather events … we need it to respond to the changing grid,” Rechtschaffen said at the meeting.

snip

The decision, paired with new resources for clean energy in the state budget, show California is “turning a corner on clean power — expanding its procurement of zero-emissions resources, orienting toward more aggressive greenhouse gas emissions targets, and investing in promising new technologies that can provide clean, reliable utility-scale power,” Danielle Osborn Mills, director of American Clean Power-California, said in a statement. Regenerate California, a joint campaign of the California Environmental Justice Alliance and Sierra Club, called the decision “a big step forward in California’s clean energy and air quality goals.”

snip

[ProfessorGAC]

75. And?

It seems they're 40 years late.
You can congratulate them if you wish.
I see them as doing this now that the gun is to their head.
If they had been more amenable to non-emitting sources in the 80s, this would not be as big a deal.
Also, that article mentions emissions free sources, but never desribes them. Renewables does not mean combustion free.

[Celerity]

87. As of 2018, at least 51.09% of California's total power mix comes from non fossil fuel

generation. These types are renewables (small hydro, solar, wind, biomass, geothermal), plus nuclear and large hydro.

In addition, 10.54% comes from 'unspecified' sources. which could include all of the above types.

The vast bulk of fossil fuel-generated electricity comes from natural gas. (34.91%)

https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation/2018

[hunter]

89. Solar is useless when the sun isn't shining. Wind is useless when the wind isn't blowing.

Hydro is useless when there's no water.

There are no feasible power storage schemes that can fill these gaps. The capacity of much-celebrated battery systems are measured in minutes and are meant to carry the load as idling gas plants power up when wind or solar drop out, as they frequently do.

You can't count solar, wind, or hydro megawatts the same as you count megawatts from a nuclear power plant. It's an accounting trick to do so.

Even gas power plants are brittle, as was demonstrated in Texas. Gas isn't stored on site at a gas power plant, it is delivered on demand. If the intricate gas delivery network fails the power plant has to shut down.

[Celerity]

90. I am one of the few here who is massively pro nuclear. The EROEI from

other non fossil fuel sources is not sufficient at the present time to discard it. The next gen and beyond reactors are extremely safe, and thorium reactors are going to be a key bridge technology.

[hunter]

91. Depleted uranium is similar to thorium as a fuel and there are large stockpiles of it.

There's over a million tonnes of the stuff stashed away in various nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium

Thorium is another element that's present in certain kinds of mining wastes.

Light water reactors use only a small fraction of the potential energy in their fuel. This used fuel can be reused in other sorts of reactors. Most of this lightly used nuclear fuel is sitting around, going nowhere, doing nothing.

wikipedia

There's no shortage of potentially fissionable fuels that have already been mined. It's just less trouble to enrich fresh uranium straight from the mines.

Reactors that use thorium or depleted uranium are typically "breed and burn" designs. Non-fissionable elements such as thorium or uranium-238 capture neutrons and are transmuted into elements that are fissionable.

One of the supposed benefits of thorium reactors is that it's much more difficult to produce bomb making materials in them.

Unfortunately that water has already passed under the bridge. The Hanford Site started producing plutonium over 75 years ago. Making bombs is an old technology; there are few secrets left. But it still requires a great deal of technical sophistication and industrial might. Any nation with that level of technical sophistication and industry isn't going to mess around trying to divert used nuclear fuel from carefully monitored commercial power plants. They'll build their own uranium enrichment plants or plutonium production reactors. That lesson was learned a long time ago from India where plutonium was diverted from a "peaceful purposes" reactors acquired from Canada and the U.S.A.. This may have been implicitly allowed as a deterrent to China.

[gldstwmn]

54. I've never cooked on an electric stove that was as good as gas.

I would imagine an electric stove that came close would be expensive if it even exists.

[Celerity]

59. Well, if you are young enough, you likely will eventually have to convert. Fossil fuels are a menace

to the planet and the human race.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

61. Sounds like a clear admission that the framing that this will not harm restaurants

in the future was false from the get-go.

It is not true that electric is equivalent to gas cooking on a stovetop.

[Celerity]

62. All you do is repeat the same thing over and over, with the added spice now of hopping into a reply

to another poster to try and reengage.

done

[Just A Box Of Rain]

63. That's quite a criticism coming from one who tries to

repeatedly deny this measure will cause harm to new restaurants under the excuse it will only apply to new construction.

This is supposed to be a friendly website. Trying to demonize people [fellow Democrats] who disagree with your policy positions isn't a good look.

[Celerity]

66. now you are goalpost moving

via changing focus to hypothetical new restaurants

also

excuse it will only apply to new construction

that is not an excuse, it is a fact


also

This is supposed to be a friendly website.

Ironic as you are the one bird-dogging me from one part of the thread to another

also, you are confusing disagreement (mine with your expressed opinions) for animosity

plus this

Trying to demonize people [fellow Democrats] who disagree with your policy positions isn't a good look.

Even more ironic, as YOU are the one having a go at actual elected Democratic polticians and their unanimously passed legislation

and

with your policy positions

My policy positions? lol

I did not draft nor did I suggest this code rewrite, nor is this a subject that I have posted on before here (gas moratoriums in new housing and business structures)

The only thing I am guilty of is agreeing with the Democratically-controlled LA City Council on this matter.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

67. Bird dogging you? That's malarkey.

You have the temerity to accuse me of spreading RW talking points because I have a different take on a public policy position in my own hometown.

Instead of offering an apology, you double down.

I did not "have a go" at Democratic leaders in my city. That's another slander that is pure invention on your part.

This is becoming harassment. Frankly.

Shame on you.

[Celerity]

68. You absolutely are bird-dogging me. I said I was done and you went back into a different part of the

thread and reengaged.

I did not "have a go" at Democratic leaders in my city.

You certainly are with your repeated claims against and criticisms of what they unanimously voted for, and using problematic framings whilst doing so.

You keep coming at me (including now falsely accusing me of slander) and now YOU are claiming harassment?

[Nixie]

71. Why personalize this?? It is your thread that is getting responses.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

72. LOL. You can decide when you are "done," but that doesn't give you the power to

decide what posts I chose respond to on an open forum.

And you have still not offered an apology for suggesting I'm spreading RW talking points (a positively scurrilous charge) or that have "taken a go" at LA City Councilpersons. Instead you've now tripled down on the unfounded insults.

I happen to be friendly with my outgoing [Democratic] Councilperson and a neighboring [Democratic] Councilperson and have worked to get both elected and re-elected.

The personal attacks and insults are totally uncalled for.

This is gaslighting on your part.

[Hekate]

81. Hang in there and welcome to DU

This person periodically needs a bit of pushback.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

84. Thanks. Such personal attacks do not seem to be in the intended spirit of this website.

Very odd.

[Hekate]

85. Yes, you are right

[gldstwmn]

74. I currently have a glass top electric stove. It gets the job done.

Electricity is produced by coal which is the original fossil fuel if I'm not mistaken. FWIW I'm 58 so I probably won't be around to see global warming at its peak. Growing up all we ever had was a gas stove. We heated our home with oil. Electric appliances didn't come until later. I'd like to convert to solar.

[Celerity]

78. 0.15% (almost none) of California in state electricity is produced by coal. 3.3% total (counting

out of state electricity importation)

(2018 stats, doubt it's changed much at all)

https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation/2018